St Francis 2008 Final PowerPoint

8/14/2019 St Francis 2008 Final PowerPoint

1/27

Mentor: Dr. Kay MalekResearch Partners: Denise Moser & Jennifer Reese

Student Researchers: Nikki Imhoff, Amy Senner,Brittney Latuch, Lauren Trotz, & Emily Christoff


2/27

IntroductionChildhood obesity has become a widespreadepidemic in the United States, withcontributing factors suggested to be

decreased physical activityandpoor nutrition.Crucial factors that may contribute to

decreased physical activityin children include:Confusion and misunderstanding of the

guidelines for physical activityAn increase in sedentary behaviors and adecrease in physical activity Schools moving away from PE due to increased

emphasis on standardized testing


3/27

PurposePurpose of the studyThe purpose of our study is to explore factors that

influence physical activity behavior in children as wellas validate the effectiveness of Functional Fitness 4

Kids as a school-based programHypotheses1st, prior to the implementation of the Functional

Fitness 4 Kids program, participants will not be

able to verbally define and identify differencesin light, moderate, and vigorous physicalactivity.

2nd, participants will show a relationship

between fitness levels and the ability to defineand identif li ht, moderate, and vi orous


4/27

MethodologyParticipantsSample of convenience 5th and 6th grade students

at a local schoolTotal number (n) of138

students: 65 fifth graders& 73 sixth graders

Boys vs Girls

Inclusion & ExclusionCriteriaInformed ConsentIRB Approval


5/27

MethodologyInstrumentation:

Pretest/Posttest DesignQuestionnaire

Physical Battery BMI 12 minute run/walk test;YMCA

3 minute step test (CRF)

Isometric Wall SquatsSits/Planks (MuscularEndurance)

Pushups/Lunges (MuscularStrength)

90/90 Hamstring (Flexibility)


6/27

MethodologyInterventionFF4K Collaborative Effort between the School District, PE teacher,

Non-profit Organization, and SFU students/mentor

Mission statement - Non-Profit Organization Curriculum Class Format (team building, circuit training, group training,

station training, etc) Equipment (optional) Education on Self-Monitoring

Borg Scale HR

Time Period for Intervention 7 weeks: 1 wk pretest, 1 week posttest, 5 wks intervention


7/27

MethodologyInterventionEach week the 40-45 minute exercise session

was based off of a sample class provided in the

FF4K instructors manual. 5-10 minute warm-up; 20-25 minutes CV/muscular

strength & endurance activities; 5-10 minute cool-down

Each session concluded with a 10-15 minute

nutritional snack and informational session onphysical activity and/or nutritional topics.Generally, station training was performed with

alternating cardiovascular exercise and

muscular strength & endurance exercises ineach of the sessions.


8/27


9/27

MethodologyWeek OneIntroduction to FF4K

Core exercises taughtTip of the day: hydration

Week Two:Taught to monitor heart rate & RPE scale

Dice gameTip of the day: Difference between light,

moderate, and vigorous activity


10/27


11/27


12/27

MethodologyWeek Three:Focused on lower extremity & core strengthening as

well as cardiovascular exercise

Tip of the day: fruits & vegetablesWeek Four:Focused on upper extremity & core strengthening

and cardiovascular exercise

Tip of the day: fiber and healthy food choicesWeek Five:Focused on balance and agility with incorporated

aerobic exerciseTip of the day: Importance of breakfast


13/27


14/27

ResultsBMI distributions of our sampleQuestionnaireDo 5th and 6th sixth graders know the difference

between light, moderate, and vigorous physicalactivity?Did their knowledge improve during this

intervention?

Physical Battery of TestsWhat kind of muscular and cardiopulmonary

endurance and strength did our participantshave initially? Did these components changeover the time that our intervention took place?Lets take a look


15/27


16/27


17/27

QuestionnaireThe results of the ten questions focused on

physical activity indicate a mean positivechange of 2.68 percent between pre-test andpost-test correct answers for the 5th grade.

Similarly, there was a mean positive changeof 2.24 percent between pre-test and post-test correct answers in the 6th grade.

The statistical significance of these numbersare to be determined in the future using a testfor non parametric data such as the Mann-

Whitney Test.


18/27

Number & CorrectNumber & Correct

Answer 6th GradeAnswer 6th Grade

Percent Correct Pre TestPercent Correct Pre Test Percent Correct Post TestPercent Correct Post Test DifferenceDifference

5C5C 81.3681.36 93.2293.22 11.8611.86

6D6D 78.3378.33 83.3383.33 55

7A7A 7575 81.6781.67 6.676.67

8C8C 8080 91.3891.38 11.3811.38

9B9B 8080 78.3378.33 -1.67-1.67

10A10A 66.1066.10 53.3353.33 -12.77-12.77

11C11C 3030 41.3841.38 11.3811.38

12A,B,C,D,E12A,B,C,D,E 22.0322.03 20.3420.34 -1.69-1.69

13A,D,E13A,D,E 33.3333.33 27.1227.12 -6.21-6.21

14B,C,D,E14B,C,D,E 8.338.33 6.786.78 -1.55-1.55


19/27

Physical Battery ResultsTest/MeasuremeTest/Measureme

ntntFifth GradeFifth Grade Sixth GradeSixth Grade

Resting HeartResting Heart

RateRate

-2 BPM-2 BPM 0 BPM0 BPM

90-90 Hamstring90-90 Hamstring

LengthLength

R -1.2 LR -1.2 L

-1.9 -1.9

R +0.88 LR +0.88 L

+2.65 +2.65

Push-UpsPush-Ups +7.4+7.4 +6.6+6.6

Lunge TestLunge Test R -1.33cm L-R -1.33cm L-

1.91 cm1.91 cm

R +0.12cm LR +0.12cm L

+3.9cm+3.9cm12 Minute Walk12 Minute Walk +1.92 laps+1.92 laps +0.22 laps+0.22 laps

YMCA 3-MinuteYMCA 3-Minute

Step TestStep Test

+5 BPM post+5 BPM post

exerciseexercise

+0.45 BPM post+0.45 BPM post

exerciseexercise

Plank TestPlank Test +21 seconds+21 seconds + 12.9 seconds+ 12.9 seconds

Isometric WallIsometric Wall

SquatSquat

+131 seconds+131 seconds +103 seconds+103 seconds


20/27

DiscussionHypothesisIn order to address our original hypothesis analyzing

whether the 5th and 6th graders knew the difference

between light, moderate, and vigorous physicalactivity, data were analyzed regarding theirresponses to 10 multiple choice questions on theadministered questionnaire which addressed thistopic.

As we mentioned in the results, an overall increaseof 2.6% in the 5th grade and 2.24% in the 6th gradescorrect responses from pretest to posttest wasdetermined.

Even though further analysis should be done todetermine whether these percentages arestatistically significant, a positive change in


21/27

DiscussionFF4KUpon observation, FF4K, as implemented by Denise

Moser, seems to be an appropriate vehicle for

children in increasing both their knowledge aboutphysical activity and their physical fitness in areasof muscular endurance, strength, flexibility, andcardiovascular endurance.

As mentioned in the results, overall, the 5th and 6thgraders made improvements in some of the physicalbattery of tests.

However, the limitations to our study prevent usfrom concluding about the overall effectiveness of

this program as implemented during school hours.FF4K is traditionall im lemented as an after school


22/27

LimitationsSpace constraints with regard to the number

of participants

Implemented in a school-based settingtherefore, some considerations were: a Dr.Seuss Reading Day, a Fire drill, spring break,and music instrument instruction.

Questionnaire


23/27

ConclusionOverall, FF4k seems to be an appropriate

model program for increasing not onlyknowledge about physical activity but alsoactual physical activity performance inchildren.

However, performing the intervention in aschool-based setting with a large amount ofstudents suggests that this may not be theappropriate environment for optimaloutcomes of the program.

Further research in differing settings and withbetter controlled conditions is warranted.


24/27


25/27

References 1. Wolf AM, Colditz GA. Current estimates of the economic cost of obesity in the United States. Obesity Research. 1998;6:97-

106.

2. Shape of the Nation Report (2006). Status of Physical Education in the USA: Conducted by the National Association forSport and Physical Education and the American Heart Association.

3. Council on Sports Medicine and Fitness and Council on School Health. Active healthy living: Prevention of childhoodobesity through increased physical activity. Pediatrics Journal. 2006; 117(5): 1834-1842.

4. Center for Disease Control (CDC). Importance of physical activity for youth. Providing healthy snacks and meals. pp.51.Available at: http://www.cdc.gov. Accessed October 31, 2007.

5. Center for Disease Control (CDC). Physical activity for everyone: physical activity terms. pp 1-3. Available at:http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/physical/terms/index.htm. Accessed October 31, 2007.

6. Koebel CI, Swank AM, Shelburne L. Fitness testing in children: A comparison between PCPFS and AAHPERD standards.Journal of Applied Sport Science Research.1992; 6(2): 107-114.

7. Ross JG, Gilbert GG. The national children and youth fitness study: A summary of findings.JOPERD. 1985; 56: 45-50 8. Presidents Council on Physical Fitness and Sports. Youth physical fitness in 1985. Washington, D.C: Presidents Council

on Physical Fitness and Sports.

9. Presidents Council on Physical Fitness and Sports. 1985 school population fitness survey: test items and normative data.Washington, D.C: Presidents Council on Physical Fitness and Sports. 1987.

10. Department of Health and Human Services: Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Summary of findingsfrom national children and youth fitness study II. JOPER. 1987; 6: 51-96.

11. Black L,Greiner K, Schellhammer E, Whipkey J, Malek K. Physical activity levels in adolescents in western Pennsylvania:Towards a school based diabetes prevention program. 2006.

12. Updated Physical Activity Guidelines. 08/01/2007. American Heart Association. Available at:http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=3049282.

13. Physical fitness and the role of physical therapy in health, wellness, and fitness. American Physical TherapyAssociation. Accessed on 11/22/2006. Available at:http://www.apta.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Info_for_Managers&TEMPLATE=/CM/htm.

14. Carraro, R. Role of prevention in the contention of the obesity epidemic. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition; 2003:57,Suppl 1, S94S96.

15. American College of Sports Medicine.ACSMs Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription. 7thed. Baltimore, MD:Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins; 2006: 58.

16. Sopher A, Shen W, Pietrobelli A. Pediatric Body Composition Methods. In: Human Body Composition. Edited by

Heymsfield S, Lohman T, Wanz ZM, Going SB. 2005 17. Tremblay MS, Barnes JD, Copeland JL, Esliger DW. Conquering childhood inactivity: Is the answer in the past? Medicine &

Science In S orts & Exercise 2005:37:1187-1194. Available from: American Colle e of S orts Medicine. Accessed October
http://www.cdc.gov/http://www.cdc.gov/http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/physical/terms/index.htmhttp://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/physical/terms/index.htmhttp://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=3049282http://www.apta.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Info_for_Managers&TEMPLATE=/CM/htmhttp://www.apta.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Info_for_Managers&TEMPLATE=/CM/htmhttp://www.apta.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Info_for_Managers&TEMPLATE=/CM/htmhttp://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=3049282http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/physical/terms/index.htmhttp://www.cdc.gov/


26/27


27/27

Date post:	30-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	ff4k
View:	220 times
Download:	0 times

St Francis 2008 Final PowerPoint

Documents